Tips: Keep the speaker's own view apart from the views the speaker reports.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Private clinics could help, but only after scheduling and data sharing are fixed.: Fixing scheduling first is the middle-ground experts' idea. The speaker does not make it a condition. Is it really wise to restructure the system before fully fixing inefficiencies we already know about? Allowing private clinics to deliver publicly funded services could help in targeted situations, but only with strict rules to protect staffing and fairness.
• Private clinics could help across the system, as long as provinces keep strong oversight.: Oversight is right, but the speaker limits private delivery to targeted situations. It is not for the whole system. Allowing private clinics to deliver publicly funded services could help in targeted situations, but only with strict rules to protect staffing and fairness. The truth likely lies somewhere between outright rejection and enthusiastic support, with careful pilot programmes and strong oversight from provincial governments.
• Private clinics could help, but only in rural areas where staff are stretched thin.: Rural areas come up as places where staff are already stretched thin. That is a reason for worry, not a place for private clinics. The Canadian Medical Association has warned that staffing is already stretched thin, especially in rural areas of Nova Scotia and northern Manitoba. Allowing private clinics to deliver publicly funded services could help in targeted situations, but only with strict rules to protect staffing and fairness.

Correct Answer: It would add capacity, and patients would not pay anything themselves.

Why this is correct: Supporters say private clinics could increase capacity. Patients could be treated faster without paying out of pocket. They point out that Canada already uses private clinics for things like dental care and physiotherapy, so extending this model to publicly funded surgeries could increase capacity. Supporters say that if private clinics were allowed to perform publicly insured procedures, patients could be treated faster without paying out of pocket.

Tips: Each choice has two parts. Check both parts against what the supporters say.

Why the other options are wrong:

• It would add capacity, and staff would get better working hours.: Capacity is right, but better hours for staff is the critics' worry, not a supporters' promise. They point out that Canada already uses private clinics for things like dental care and physiotherapy, so extending this model to publicly funded surgeries could increase capacity. If private clinics can offer better hours or working conditions, the public hospitals might actually see longer waits.
• It would lower costs, and patients would not pay anything themselves.: Supporters talk about more capacity, not lower costs. Costs come up when critics say they become harder to control. They point out that Canada already uses private clinics for things like dental care and physiotherapy, so extending this model to publicly funded surgeries could increase capacity. Others argue that once private delivery expands, it becomes harder to control costs and maintain equal access.
• It would lower costs, and staff would get better working hours.: Both parts are wrong. Supporters talk about more capacity, and better hours for staff is the critics' worry. They point out that Canada already uses private clinics for things like dental care and physiotherapy, so extending this model to publicly funded surgeries could increase capacity. If private clinics can offer better hours or working conditions, the public hospitals might actually see longer waits.

Correct Answer: Operating rooms in private facilities sit unused, which wastes them.

Why this is correct: The surgeon says unused operating rooms in private facilities are a wasted resource. That supports letting them do public surgeries. An orthopaedic surgeon I heard speak on CBC Radio argued that unused operating rooms in private facilities are a wasted resource.

Tips: Each choice has two parts. Check where the waste is and what is wasted.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Surgeons in private facilities have unused time, which wastes them.: The place is right, but the surgeon talks about rooms, not people. Critics say staff are already stretched thin. An orthopaedic surgeon I heard speak on CBC Radio argued that unused operating rooms in private facilities are a wasted resource. The Canadian Medical Association has warned that staffing is already stretched thin, especially in rural areas of Nova Scotia and northern Manitoba.
• Operating rooms in public hospitals sit unused, which wastes them.: Unused rooms are right, but they are in private facilities. The surgeon does not talk about public hospitals. An orthopaedic surgeon I heard speak on CBC Radio argued that unused operating rooms in private facilities are a wasted resource. headlines about crowded emergency rooms have made this discussion especially urgent
• Surgeons in public hospitals have unused time, which wastes them.: Both parts are wrong. The surgeon talks about unused rooms in private facilities. An orthopaedic surgeon I heard speak on CBC Radio argued that unused operating rooms in private facilities are a wasted resource.

Correct Answer: It backs the critics' view with a warning about staff shortages in rural areas.

Why this is correct: The warning comes in the critics' part. It says staffing is already stretched thin, especially in rural areas. Critics worry that privatisation, even in a limited form, could pull doctors and nurses away from the public system. The Canadian Medical Association has warned that staffing is already stretched thin, especially in rural areas of Nova Scotia and northern Manitoba.

Tips: Notice which group is speaking when a source is named.

Why the other options are wrong:

• It backs the middle-ground view with a warning about staff shortages in rural areas.: The rural warning is right, but it is in the critics' part. The middle-ground view is about management. The Canadian Medical Association has warned that staffing is already stretched thin, especially in rural areas of Nova Scotia and northern Manitoba. Some health policy experts suggest that the problem is less about ownership and more about management.
• It backs the critics' view with a warning about staff shortages in emergency rooms.: The side is right, but the warning names rural areas of Nova Scotia and northern Manitoba. It does not mention emergency rooms. The Canadian Medical Association has warned that staffing is already stretched thin, especially in rural areas of Nova Scotia and northern Manitoba. headlines about crowded emergency rooms have made this discussion especially urgent
• It backs the middle-ground view with a warning about staff shortages in emergency rooms.: Both parts are wrong. The warning backs the critics, and it is about rural areas. Critics worry that privatisation, even in a limited form, could pull doctors and nurses away from the public system. The Canadian Medical Association has warned that staffing is already stretched thin, especially in rural areas of Nova Scotia and northern Manitoba.

Correct Answer: Sympathetic toward the frustration behind them, but cautious about private clinics.

Why this is correct: The speaker understands the frustration and calls long waits worrying. But the speaker stays cautious about private clinics. To some extent, I understand the frustration driving calls for private options. Long waits are worrying and, in some cases, harmful. However, I remain cautious.

Tips: Feelings can have two parts. Listen for a feeling about the people and a feeling about the plan.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Sympathetic toward the frustration behind them, and enthusiastic about private clinics.: The sympathy is right, but the speaker remains cautious. The speaker even rejects enthusiastic support. However, I remain cautious. The truth likely lies somewhere between outright rejection and enthusiastic support, with careful pilot programmes and strong oversight from provincial governments.
• Impatient with the frustration behind them, but cautious about private clinics.: The caution is right, but the speaker understands the frustration. Long waits are called worrying and sometimes harmful. To some extent, I understand the frustration driving calls for private options. Long waits are worrying and, in some cases, harmful.
• Impatient with the frustration behind them, and enthusiastic about private clinics.: Both parts are wrong. The speaker understands the frustration and remains cautious. To some extent, I understand the frustration driving calls for private options. However, I remain cautious.

Correct Answer: It was nearly twice as long as the median.

Why this is correct: The national median was a little over 27 weeks, about half a year. The neighbour waited nearly a year, so nearly twice as long. According to a 2023 report from the Fraser Institute, the median wait time between a GP referral and treatment reached over 27 weeks nationwide. Last winter, a neighbour of mine in Mississauga waited nearly a year for a knee replacement, and supporters would say that kind of delay is unacceptable in a wealthy country.

Tips: When you hear two amounts of time, compare them roughly in your head.

Why the other options are wrong:

• It was only a few weeks longer than the median.: Nearly a year is about 50 weeks. The median was a little over 27 weeks. That gap is far more than a few weeks. According to a 2023 report from the Fraser Institute, the median wait time between a GP referral and treatment reached over 27 weeks nationwide. Last winter, a neighbour of mine in Mississauga waited nearly a year for a knee replacement, and supporters would say that kind of delay is unacceptable in a wealthy country.
• It was about half as long as the median.: The neighbour waited longer than the median, not less. Nearly a year is much more than 27 weeks. According to a 2023 report from the Fraser Institute, the median wait time between a GP referral and treatment reached over 27 weeks nationwide. Last winter, a neighbour of mine in Mississauga waited nearly a year for a knee replacement, and supporters would say that kind of delay is unacceptable in a wealthy country.
• It was about as long as the median.: The median was about half a year. The neighbour waited nearly a full year, which is much longer. According to a 2023 report from the Fraser Institute, the median wait time between a GP referral and treatment reached over 27 weeks nationwide. Last winter, a neighbour of mine in Mississauga waited nearly a year for a knee replacement, and supporters would say that kind of delay is unacceptable in a wealthy country.